How companies can deal with in-work sickness - FT中文網
登錄×
電子郵件/用戶名
密碼
記住我
請輸入郵箱和密碼進行綁定操作:
請輸入手機號碼,透過簡訊驗證(目前僅支援中國大陸地區的手機號):
請您閱讀我們的用戶註冊協議私隱權保護政策,點擊下方按鈕即視爲您接受。
就業

How companies can deal with in-work sickness

High levels of post-pandemic absenteeism are creating headaches for employers

The coronavirus pandemic is over, but increased sickness is not. In many developed economies, more working people are reporting illnesses that limit the amount or type of work they can do than pre-pandemic. More sick days are being taken, too. German executives warn high absenteeism is compounding the country’s competitiveness problems; in September, Tesla bosses resorted to snap home visits to check up on absent employees at its Berlin plant. In Norway, workers called in sick in the second quarter more than at any time in the past 15 years.

In the UK, official figures estimated a record 185.6mn working days were lost through sickness absence in 2022, for reasons including minor illnesses, musculoskeletal problems and mental health conditions. Post-pandemic healthcare backlogs are partly responsible. Last year some 3.7mn working-age people were in work with a “work-limiting” condition — up 1.4mn in 10 years. The rate of work-limiting conditions has grown fastest among young workers, with sharp increases in reported mental ill health.

Having fewer people working means economies do not grow as fast as they could. It reduces tax receipts to fund increasingly strained public services. But it is employers and businesses that have to deal with the immediate effects of sickness — managing staff and rotas, and confronting any legal backlash. Changes in diagnosis rates and generational attitudes to mental ill health, in particular, have influenced employee expectations of the workplace.

Prioritising employee wellbeing is about building trust and loyalty as well as ensuring long-term productivity. Compassion has to be balanced with practicality. Bosses must provide adequate support to absent workers — but also take into account the impact on other staff and operations.

A transparent and fair sickness policy is vital. Companies need to lay out expectations for reporting illness, documenting absences and returning to work — including when doctor’s notes are needed. If employees know they will be treated fairly and consistently, they are more likely to adhere to the rules, fostering a culture of mutual respect and accountability.

Identifying patterns of absenteeism can help to reveal underlying issues, such as frequent Monday absences or sick leave during school holidays, and signal when bosses need to step in earlier to address concerns at home, burnout or stress. But any sense that bosses are using data ultimately to punish staff will backfire, breeding resentment.

Data should be a conversation starter to better understand the conditions of absences rather than hitting out at those perceived to be slacking. Absenteeism can reflect deeper issues such as excessive workloads, demotivated staff or a lack of support.

But the need for support during poor health is matched by the need for accountability. Problems arise when managers feel trust is being exploited. Setting boundaries on flexible policies and maintaining clear expectations can prevent abuse while still offering assistance. Employees must understand that flexibility is often a benefit, not an entitlement, and respect the parameters set by their employers.

For bosses, employee health information also needs to be handled with the utmost care, and not just to avoid any legal ramifications. When employees believe that their most sensitive information is met with discretion, they will be more open to sharing health issues, and seeking support at their most vulnerable time.

Some companies rely on high pay or rewarding work to attract staff, but in a competitive market, commitments to wellbeing can also help employers to stand out. Building a successful enterprise relies above all, though, on both sides creating a relationship of trust.

版權聲明:本文版權歸FT中文網所有,未經允許任何單位或個人不得轉載,複製或以任何其他方式使用本文全部或部分,侵權必究。

川普的貿易「解放日」是什麼?

美國總統將4月2日定爲全面升級關稅政策的時刻。

「這不是父母的錯」:數字權利活動家比班•基德龍

這位從電影導演轉爲無黨派上議院議員的人士談論了與大型科技公司鬥爭以保護兒童的經歷,以及失聲如何讓她對權力有了新的見解。

使利比亞持續分裂的非法石油貿易

高額補貼的燃料被走私出境,銷往國外,幫助維持對立政治派別的生存。

暴雨將至:我們爲何忽視地表水氾濫風險的上升?

新的模型顯示,英國有460萬處房產面臨降雨量超過地面吸收能力的風險,比一年前增加了43%。保險公司正在撤退,但很少有房主願意接受他們的脆弱性。

哥倫比亞大學校長在屈從川普要求後辭職

卡特里娜•阿姆斯特朗在該機構同意一系列改革以避免資金削減一週後離職。

主動型ETF:歐洲陷入困境的資產管理公司的救命稻草?

成長迅速,但起點較低,而且美國的大型競爭對手已經佔據了市場主導地位。
設置字型大小×
最小
較小
默認
較大
最大
分享×